Swanner: I know this will surprise you, I actually saw the original The Man from U.N.C.L.E. TV series in the 60’s this film was based on. This was one of my mom’s favorite shows. I was excited to see what they would do with the series. When I looked further and realized Guy Ritchie was the director, I expected the worst.
Judd: I was debating myself if I wanted to see the movie, and when I saw Ritchie was the director, I decided to go; I like his style. I think the areas of U.N.C.L.E. that his trademark flair work the best, but where the movie fails is when Ritchie tries to be too serious — which, unfortunately, seemed to be all the big chase sequences.
Swanner: I had no problem with the action. I didn’t like the leads. Henry Cavill and Armie Hammer were mediocre at best. Cavill plays Napoleon Solo and, yes, he’s handsome, but the role needs a bit less Bond charm and more Bond spy. Hammer plays Russian Illya Kuryakin, he’s terrible. His accent was MIA through most of the film, and why do people think he can act? Outside of that, the film moves well as an action picture but if they think they can franchise this film they better recast.
Judd: I liked Cavill in his role. I thought he was doing his best Robert Vaughn impression, but I agree there was no chemistry between Cavill and Hammer. Every “Odd Couple” moment they had together fell flat. The scene with them bickering over fashion was particularly unfunny. I also disagree with you that the movie needed less charm and more spy; I think it needed more campy charm and less action — and that’s the real issue here. You and I wanted two different movies, and what we got satisfied neither.
Swanner: You’re right. I wanted action like we got in Kingsman and you wanted camp charm like they had in Spy. I guess it comes down to the fact in a year with all these spy movies this isn’t the best or even second. I’m glad I can say I liked a Guy Ritchie movie, but as you mentioned, neither of us got the movie we were hoping to see.
Swanner: ** ½
Judd: ** ½